Guest View: The Kinder Morgan pipeline is a bad deal for Massachusetts

Monday

Aug 11, 2014 at 12:01 AM

I've been surprised in recent weeks that outside the immediate towns and cities that could be affected by the proposed Kinder Morgan pipeline, I haven't heard or seen much about this enormous project, nor heard a lot of thinking on it from Massachusetts lawmakers and decision makers.

EVAN FALCHUK

I've been surprised in recent weeks that outside the immediate towns and cities that could be affected by the proposed Kinder Morgan pipeline, I haven't heard or seen much about this enormous project, nor heard a lot of thinking on it from Massachusetts lawmakers and decision makers.

The long and short is that the Tennessee Gas Pipeline Co., a subsidiary of Kinder Morgan Energy Partners, wants to build a new natural gas pipeline that would slice across the northern tier of Massachusetts, involving dozens of communities and the people who reside in them. Not exactly small potatoes.

Like a lot of people out there, I'm against this proposed project. Frankly put, I view the proposed Kinder Morgan pipeline as a bad deal for the people of the commonwealth, for several key reasons.

For starters, while burning natural gas generates less greenhouse gases than other fossil fuels, in Massachusetts we're already overly reliant on natural gas for electricity generation. And in contrast to the proposed natural gas facility in Salem, which will reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the source of this natural gas — hydraulic fracturing, or "fracking" — raises serious environmental concerns.

I believe we have both an opportunity and a responsibility to work to generate as much of our energy needs as possible right here in the commonwealth. Our energy supply must be resilient, diverse, predictable, consistent with our responsibilities under the Global Warming Solutions Act and aligned with the opportunities of the growing renewable energy sector.

Further, the estimated $1.2 billion required just to build the pipeline would be much better spent on infrastructure for distributed, renewable solutions such as wind and solar, smart grid technology, and other ways to make Massachusetts more modern and efficient.

Now add to this the substantial takings of private land the pipeline would mean, and the disruption of local communities that it would bring. These takings — including public and private conservation land — would involve unacceptable costs. Suppose you own one of those homes or businesses that would be completely uprooted in the interest of the pipeline and Kinder Morgan. Building the pipeline across nearly the entire northern tier of our state might spell great news for them — but not so much for you when it comes to everything from your property values and environmental concerns to everyday quality of life.

The larger issue is that our focus must be on creating a power generation system that is distributed and resilient, and which expands and effectively integrates renewable energy. Related to this, we must also focus on fostering the growth of thriving communities based on the principles of Smart Growth, including infrastructure investment that aligns public policy and supports local planning. And we must generate as much energy locally as we can — and work to harden our energy infrastructure to ensure it is resilient enough to withstand stronger and more frequent storms, as well as other natural and man-made disasters.

Above all, this requires a strategic approach to supporting the energy needs of the people of Massachusetts and a 21st century economy. A massive, long-term investment in infrastructure for the transport of natural gas through this pipeline — much of which would be destined for export overseas — is inconsistent with these goals.

You may have read about the "Rolling Rally," a large assembly of organizations and people opposed to the pipeline. The rally concluded on the Boston Common on July 30, and I was fortunate to participate. Here, one woman I spoke with said she thought our political process has basically turned into "the big interests getting to do whatever they like," as she put it. "The fact that it's happening in our backyards is a huge wake-up call," she told me. It's comments like these from people whose lives would be so affected that should be provoking much greater interest and concern from decision makers in the commonwealth.

Nearly half of the valuation of Kinder Morgan Energy Partners comes from the Natural Gas pipeline's business, according to public record. The pipeline network is the company's largest natural gas asset, representing almost unimaginable profit. Like a lot of important issues these days, the business interests of one enormous company should not trump the best interests of the people of Massachusetts.

Never miss a story

Choose the plan that's right for you.
Digital access or digital and print delivery.